CVE-2024-51180VulnerabilityPublished 29 Oct 2024

CVE-2024-51180: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.8 High.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.8High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 40% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 29 Oct 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-25.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

1. Implement strict input validation on the 'searchifsccode' parameter to allow only expected characters (e.g., alphanumeric and specific symbols) and reject or sanitize all others. 2. Apply proper output encoding/escaping on all reflected user inputs before rendering them in HTML contexts to prevent script execution. 3. Employ Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to restrict the execution of untrusted scripts and reduce the impact of potential XSS attacks. 4. Educate users and administrators about the risks of clicking untrusted links and encourage cautious behavior with URLs received via email or messaging. 5. Monitor web application logs for suspicious requests containing script payloads targeting the vulnerable parameter. 6. If possible, upgrade to a patched version of the software once available or consider alternative solutions with better security practices. 7. Use web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules designed to detect and block reflected XSS payloads targeting this parameter. 8. Conduct regular security assessments and code reviews focusing on input handling and output encoding to prevent similar vulnerabilities.

Description

A Reflected Cross Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability was found in /ifscfinder/index.php in PHPGurukul IFSC Code Finder Project v1.0, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via the "searchifsccode" parameter.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is on the confidentiality of users interacting with the vulnerable application, as attackers can steal session cookies, credentials, or other sensitive data via malicious scripts. The integrity impact is limited but could allow attackers to manipulate displayed content or perform actions on behalf of users in some cases. Availability impact is low but could be exploited to cause minor disruptions or browser crashes. Organizations running the PHPGurukul IFSC Code Finder Project v1.0 risk reputational damage, user trust loss, and potential regulatory consequences if user data is compromised. Since the vulnerability requires user interaction, phishing campaigns could leverage this flaw to increase success rates. The scope change in the CVSS vector indicates that the attack can affect resources beyond the vulnerable component, potentially compromising user sessions across the application. Financial institutions, fintech companies, and websites providing banking information that rely on this software are at risk. The lack of known exploits in the wild suggests the window for proactive mitigation is still open, but the high CVSS score demands urgent action.

CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/Santoshcyber1/CVE-wirteup/blob/main/Phpgurukul/IFSC%20Code%20Finder/IFSC%20Code%20Finder%20do.pdf (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Feb 2026, 01:24 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats